^ 




(p5l 



^ L^ U^\jp 



COf^ 



z 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



020 914 421 9 



'^\ 



HoUinger Corp. 



D 639 
.E4 M6 
Copy 2 

THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 



REPORT UPON THE STATEMENTS OF PRO- 
FESSOR ROBERT McNUTT McELROY 
AND THE EXECUTIVE COMMIT- 
TEE OF THE NATIONAL SE- 
CURIIY LP:AGUE RE- 
LATING TO THE 
UNIVERSITY OF 
WISCONSIN 



By 



JOHN BRADLEY WINSLOW. 
CHIEF JUSTICE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT 

CHARLES R. VAN HISE, 

PRESIDENT OF THE UMIVERSITr' 

AND 

E. A. BIRGE, 

DEAN OF THE COLLEGE OF LETTERS AND SCIENCE 






-^^ of D. 

rtb 25 1919 



.1>^ 






INTRODUCTION 

In an interview printed by the New York Tribune of 
April 17, 1918, Dr. Robert McNutt McElroy says he 
decided deliberately to insult the students of the Uni- 
versity of Wisconsin in the course of an address which 
he delivered at Madison on April 6 as a representative 
of the National Security League. The facts show that he 
executed this intention in such a way that the audience 
was equally ignorant of his words and of his intention 
until from a safe distance he publicly boasted of them 
and of the courage which he displayed in the perform- 
ance. His boast, as issued through the press, includes 
a claim that he called the cadet regiment "a bunch of 
damned traitors" and charged its members with disloy- 
alty; that the regiment accepted his offensive language 
in silence ; and he contrasted their passive submission to 
his gross and intentional insults with the response which 
students of another university would have made to such 
treatment; whereas the members of the regiment did not 
submit in silence, because they did not hear the intended 
insults. 

The faculty of the University made prompt protest to 
the National Security League regarding these claims of 
its agent. After long delay a reply was received from 
the President and Executive Committee on May 31. In 
this they endorse Dr. McElroy 's statements "without 
qualification " as " absolutely exact ' '. They thus assume 
official responsibility for his statements in the eastern 
press, against which the University protested. In deal- 

[3] 



ing with specific matters the reply employs language 
which is ambiguous and so worded as to avoid the issues 
raised by the University, and to lead the public inLo 
believing that they have been met. 

The University of Wisconsin waited long and in full 
confidence for the reply of the Executive Committee of 
the League. It seemed incredible that the officers of an 
organization of its standing would i)ass without rebuke 
the public bragging of its representative that he had 
offered gross insults to an audience, even though this 
boast was not true. It seemed impossible that such a 
responsible organization would endorse as "absolutely 
exact" statements whose falseness had been shown by 
overv/helming proof. 

But both of these things have happened. The Univer- 
sity of Wisconsin is therefore compelled to issue the fol- 
lowing statement of the facts and of its position. Only 
by such action can the members of the National Security 
League become aware of the conduct of its officers. Only 
by such action can the friends of the University of Wis- 
consin be placed in a position to meet the calumnies of 
Dr. McElroy. 



I— THE FACTS IN THE CASE 

1. At the Agricultural Pavilion of the University of 
Wisconsin on April 6, 1918, Professor Robert McNutt 
McElroy, representing the National Security League, 
addressed an audience which included the cadet regi- 
ment of the University of Wisconsin. The address was 
a long one. The students, before the meeting, had 
marched two and a half miles in the rain ; and they were 

[4 ] 



wet and cold tliroiigliout the prolonged address. Dur- 
ing the latter part of it many of the students became 
inattentive and nolay. They desired that Professor 
McElroy should close his speech and they indicated this 
in a manner which students not infrequently use. Be- 
ing present under orders, they could not withdraw, as 
did the larger part of the remainder of the audience. 
Neither the students as a whole, nor any group of them, 
did anything which could properly be interpreted as 
indicating a lack of loyalty. They gave close atten- 
tion and warm response to the patriotic addresses of 
Miss Burke and Senator Lenroot, the first of whom 
spoke before Dr. McElroy and the second after him. 

2. Professor McElroy became irritated by the noise 
and inattention and uttered ejaculations reflecting in 
profane terms on the loyalty of his audience, then al- 
most reduced to the university cadet corps. He uttered 
them in so low a voice that there is wide difference of 
opinion regarding his exact words, even among those who 
sat near him on the stage. Many persons sitting within 
twenty feet of him upon the stage did not hear the words 
at all ; and, so far as can be ascertained, no student heard 
them. According to the evidence presented, when Pro- 
fessor McElroy took his seat at the close of his address 
he made a second objectionable remark to Miss Burke. 
(See Exhibit D.) 

3. xVfter his return to New York, Dr. McElroy gave 
an account of his western trip, which was issued oftieially 
by the National Security League on April 15 ; and in it 
he states that he had faced ' ' large bodies of young men 
clad in the uniform of the American army beneath 
which were concealed the souls of Prussians. " (See Ex- 
hibit A.) He brought out the full meaning of this state- 
ment in an interview printed in the New York Tribune 

[5] 



of April 17. This interview, after inentioning the noisi- 
ness of the students, represents Dr. McElroy as saying: 

Finally I couldn't stand it any longer. I determined to find 
out whether it was my fault or whether it was the American 
point of view that these young men objected to. So I leaned 
forward and I deliberately insulted them. 

"Do you know what I think of you from your conduct to- 
night?" I said. "I think you're a bunch of damned traitors!" 

Well, what do you think happened? A loud outcry of pro- 
test? A stampede to pull me down on the platform? A de- 
mand that I retract that affront to their university? No, 
sir; not any of those things. What happened was absolutely 
nothing — not a murmur, not a sound, except that toward the 
back of the room a few men snickered. 

I was not only thunderstruck; I was appalled. If a speaker 
said that to a group of men at my university, Princeton, 1 
should hate to have to answer for the consequences. But 
even then I thought I'd test them a little further — give them 
another chance, as it were. So a little later I said: "I've 
often wondered what it would be like to speak before a Prus- 
sian audience. I think I know now." Still there was no 
protest— no slightest sign of resentment. 

I hesitate ... to accuse an entire university of dis- 
loyalty, and many people have since tried to reassure me as 
to Wisconsin. ... I say that a thing like that should 
be investigated. (See Exhibit B.) 

The fact that Professor McElroy gave this interview 
has been confirmed by President IVIenken of the National 
Security League in the presence of the three persons who 
sign this report. He says, however, that Professor Mc- 
Elroy did not give out the name of the institution of 
which he was speaking. Granting this to be true, it 
seems quite immaterial. The interview in question 
named the institution as the University of Wisconsin; 
and as Professor McElroy has never publicly disavowed 
the interview either in whole or in part, it has become 
his in its entirety by the simplest principles of ratifica- 
tion. 

[6] 



The complaint of the University of Wisconsin against 
Dr. McElroy was and is based on these published state- 
ments, and not upon his half-audible words, uttered in 
the heat of irritation. (See Exhibit B.) 

4. After Dr. McElroy 's interview of April 17 reached 
Madison, the faculty of the University adopted, April 24, 
a resolution asking from the National Security League 
"reparation, full, explicit, and emphatic", for the acts 
of its agent. (See Exhibit C.) 

5. On May 11 President Menken of the National Se- 
curity League visited Madison and conferred with the 
three men who prepared this report. He was put into 
possession of the facts. During his return journey, Mr. 
Menken issued, on behalf of the League, an official state- 
ment, which was published in the Cliicago Tribune of 
May 13. The statement contains the following refer- 
ence to the events at the Agricultural Pavilion: "they 
[the students] showed their restlessness at an inoppor- 
tune moment, when McElroy was reading from the Presi- 
dent 's message. He misinterpreted their action as that 
of disloyalty. It was most unfortunate, and when he is 
convinced of that fact I am sure he will be glad to say 
so." (See Exhibit E.) 

6. For some time, however, the University received 
no direct statement from President Menken although tele- 
grams were sent him regarding the matter. On May 31 
the following printed document was received from Presi- 
dent Menken, mailed in New York on ]\Iay 28, eleven 
days after the date of its adoption : 



[7 ] 



Resolution 

Adopted by the Executive Committee of the National 
Security League at a meeting held on Friday, May 17, 
1918. 

At a meeting of the Executive Committee of the Na- 
tional Security League, held on Friday, May 17, 1918, 
Mr, Menken reported on his trip to ]\Iadison, Wis. He 
stated that it was his belief after his investigation, that 
without qualification, every statement made by Professor 
McElroy was a))solutely exact; that Professor McElroy 
had made no reflection upon the loyalty of cither the 
University or the State of Wisconsin, and that the at- 
tack of the University, made without investigation of the 
facts, was unwarranted. 

He further stated that he found that the University 
was doing a vast amount of constructive patriotic work, 
which fact did not justify the conduct of certain of its 
students, whose disorder Professor McElroy interpreted 
to their faces as due to lack of patriotic interest. 

Thereupon the following resolution was adopted: 

Resolved, That the report of the President concern- 
ing his visit to Wisconsin be accepted, that in view of 
the full disclaimer and proof that no imputation con- 
cerning the loyalty of the University of Wisconsin and 
of the State of Wisconsin has been made by Dr. McEl- 
roy, the Executive Committee of the National Security 
League is fully satisfied with the explanation of the facts 
regarding the disorder in the audience during Dr. Mc- 
Elroy 's address and they fully endorse Dr. McElroy 's 
statements and acts in his Western tour, and the matter 
shall be regarded as closed. 



[8 ] 



II— THE POSITION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF 
WISCONSIN 

A. As TO Dr. McElroy 

1. The University has not "attacked" Dr. McElroy 
on account of the angry words uttered at the Agricul- 
tural Pavilion. Few people heard them at all ; fewer 
still understood the words ; few if any thought them 
anything but the sotta voce petulance of an orator Avho 
had faileei to hold his audience. 

2. The University of Wisconsin asserts that Dr. Mc- 
Elroy 's account of the matter, contained in the New 
York Tribune of April 17 and elsewhere, is not a true 
statement of what occurred. Its slight basis of fact is 
in the disorder among the students during his address 
and in Dr. McElroy 's low-spoken offensive remarks. 
Dr. McElroy did not "deliberately insult" the cadet 
corps, calling them "damned traitors"; for an audience 
cannot be insulted by words they do not hear. The 
corps did not receive the alleged insult in silence, "ex- 
cept that ... a few men snickered"; for Dr. McElroy 's 
assertion that they were inattentive and noisy is fully 
true. Dr. McElroy did not "test them further". The 
scene so dramatically described by Dr. McElroy of a 
large audience of young men submitting without pro- 
test to the charge of being traitors to their country nevei* 
took place. 

3. The University of Wisconsin asserts that Dr. Mc- 
Elroy 's published interview constitutes a charge of dis- 
loyalty directed against the cadet corps of the Univer- 
sity. It asserts that in charging the cadet corps, some 
twelve hundred students, with disloyalty, he attacked 

[9 ] 



the loyalty of the University. Substantially all of the 
male undergraduate students are members of that corps 
or have been enrolled in it. Moreover, he said: "I 
hesitate to accuse an entire university of disloyalty 
. . . But . . ." (See Exhibit B.) 

The charge is found, not in the spoken words of Dr. 
McElroy but in his statements subsequently printed. 

B. As TO THE National Security League 

1. The Faculty of the University promptly asked from 
the League "reparation" for the acts of its agent. 
Pending such action it continued its relation of unal- 
tered friendliness with the League. This relation con- 
tinued until May 31, when the reply of. the League 
(adopted May 17) was received at ]\Iadisoii. 

When President Menken was in Madison he was in- 
formed that the University of Wisconsin had no com- 
plaint against the League ; that its charges were against 
Professor McElroy. On May 31, when the reply of the 
League was received, a telegram was sent to President 
Menken withdrawing the statement that there was no 
complaint against the League. (See Exhibit H.) 

2. The University, through its representatives, made 
perfectly clear to President Menken on May 11 that the 
"reparation" desired was a disavowal of the statement 
quoted above from "the matter officially issued by the 
League; a withdrawal or disavowal of Dr. McElroy 's 
published interview ; that is, such apology for misrepre- 
sentation and insult as gentlemen are wont to offer ; and 
that the University could not accept, instead of this, a 
certificate of loyalty from the National Security League. 



[10 ] 



C. As TO THE Resolution of the Executive 
Committee of the League, Dated May 17 

1. President Menken reports his belief "that with- 
out qualification eveiy statement made by Professor 
McElroy was absolutely exact. ' ' This must mean, among 
other things, that President Menken endorses Dr. McEl- 
roy 's statement that he "deliberately insulted" the ca- 
det corps of the University; that he called them 
"damned traitors" and "Prussians"; and that they ac- 
cepted this characterization. These statements, Presi- 
dent Menken says, are "absolutely exact." The Uni- 
versity asserts that they are ' ' absolutely ' ' false. 

He then goes on to state "that Professor McElroy had 
made no reflection upon the loyalty" of the University. 
We must accept President Menken's statement as em- 
bodying his own judgment and that of his Executive 
Committee. It is conceivable that they would not re- 
gard it as an imputation of disloyalty to the National 
Security League if a large share of its members were in 
print called "damned traitors" and said to possess the 
"souls of Prussians". But if this is so, then the blood 
of the officers of the National Security League is less 
easily stirred than that of the members and friends of 
the University of Wisconsin. 

President Menken states that the "attack of the Uni- 
versity" on Dr. McElroy was "made without investiga- 
tion of the facts". This statement is wholly incorrect. 
The facts were most carefully investigated on the testi- 
mony of many men who heard Dr. McElroy 's speech. 
When President Menken was in Madison on May 11 the 
only evidence he took was that presented to him by the 
signers of this statement. They were ready to have 
the full evidence taken from as many people as he de- 
sired to meet. This was not done by President Menken, 

[11] 



who expressed himself as fully satisfied with the state- 
ment of facts he had received and said that he did not 
care to take up the matter with others. That he was 
satisfied that a retraction was due to the University by 
Dr. MeElroy is shown by his official statement in the 
Chicago Tribune of May 13 (See Exhibit E). The sub- 
sequent statement of President Menken that the ''at- 
tack" of the University was made without investigation 
is wholly at variance with the facts. The University 
can not accept it as either fair or truthful. 

2. The resolution of the Executive Committee of the 
League speaks of ''the full disclaimer and proof that no 
imputation concerning the loyalty of the University of 
Wisconsin and of the State of Wisconsin has been made 
by Dr. McElroy." 

This statement appears to be an evasion of the issue. 
The University of Wisconsin asserts that Dr. McElroy 's 
printed interview charged it with disloyalty and asks 
the League for reparation. The League replies that Dr. 
McElroy had not imputed disloyalty to the Universit.y 
and to the State. Let tlie reader go through Exhibits 
A and B and judge for himself. 

The same lack of explicitness runs through the rest 
of the resolution. It states that the League "is fully 
satisfied with the explanation of the facts regarding the 
disorder in the audience during Dr. McElroy 's address". 
Does this mean that the League is fully satisfied with 
Dr. McElroy 's explanation of "damned traitors", or 
with President Menken's explanation published in the 
Chicago Tribune of May 13 of "restlessness at an inop- 
portune moment"? This is precisely the question be- 
tween the University and the League; and again the 
Executive Committee of the League does not meet the 
issue. 

[12 ] 



Finally, the resolutions "fully endorse Dr. McElroy's 
statements and acts in his Western tour". 

This is the third attempt to bury the issue under gen- 
eralities. The University has not protested against the 
acts done or words spoken by Dr. McElroy "in his wes- 
tern tour." It has protested against Dr. McElroy's 
printed statements concerning the University, made af- 
ter his return to the East. For these statements it has 
asked reparation. This request President Menken, af- 
ter investigation, thought reasonable (see Exhibit E). 
The Executive Committee of the League, however, meets 
the request not with a disavowal of words obviously un- 
true, but hj a general support of the agent, expressed 
in words sure to be misinterpreted by those not fully 
informed with regard to the facts. Dr. McElroy's 
printed statements insulted the loyalty of the university ; 
the reply of the Executive Committee of the League is 
an insult to its intelligence. 

John Bradley Winslow, 
Chaeles R. Van Hise, 

E. A. BiRGE. 



[13] 



APPENDIX 

As an appendix there are printed all the documents 
to which reference is made or from which quotations 
are taken, so far as they are pertinent to the matter 
discussed. The omission, in printing, of any part of a 
document is indicated. 



Exhibit A 

Released for Publication on or after April 15 

From the National Security League, 

19 West 44th Street, N. Y. C. 

E. L. Harvey, Publicity Director. 

NATIONAL SECURITY LEAGUE LEADER SAYS 
WEST NEEDS AROUSING ON WAR 

Dr. Robert M. McElroy, Leag"ue's Educational Direc- 
tor, finds pro-Germanism, apathy and ignorance in 
Western tour 

New York, April , — Open pro-Germanism, apathy 
toward the war and ignorance of its real meanings to 
an alarming extent were discovered by Dr. Robert M. 
McElroy, Educational Director of the National Security 
League, in a three weeks' tour through the West from 
which he returned to this city today. 
(Here is omitted material not pertinent to this report.) 

[ 14 ] 



Peo-Germans at Heart 

It is fair to say, however, that this condition is the 
exception and not the rule. Even in the states like 
Wisconsin, where the German blood is perhaps thirty 
per cent of the total population, and where the Ger- 
man affiliation by marriage adds certainly another 
twenty per cent, even in such commonwealths, and they 
are few, many of the foreign-born have already caught 
the ideas which are able to transform the people of any 
blood into Americans as real as though their ancestors 
had fought with Washington to make this Republic or 
with Lincoln to save it. 

But we must face the fact that there are still many 
communities with pro-Germans at heart enjoying a 
liberty which makes possible such scandals to our 
civilization as the opening of parochial schools with 
the singing of ''Deutschland ueber Alles" and the con- 
ducting of the work of the schools in the language of 
the deadly foe to our ideals and our civilization. 

In this trip, I have known what it was to face vast 
audiences shot through and through with unmistakable 
signs of pro-German sympathies; to face large bodies 
of young men clad in the uniform of the American 
army beneath which were concealed the souls of Prus- 
sians. These are the danger spots in our Republic, 
these are the signs unmistakable that the process of 
assimilation has not been successfully accomplished, and 
that therefore v/e are lacldng the common background 
which is essential to the safety not only of America 
but of those institutions which America holds in trust 
for all humanity. 

(Remainder of article irrelevant to issue.) 



[ 15 ] 



Exhibit B 
(From the New York Tribune, April 17, 1918.) 

WEST IS CROWDED WITH PRO-GERMANS, 

DR. Mcelroy says 

Government Should Investigate University of 
Wisconsin, He Declares 

Dr. Robert McElroy, back from the National Se- 
curity League speaking tour, which took him through 
nine states, filled in yesterday the background of some 
of his charges of pro-Germanism and anti-Americanism. 

"At the University of Wisconsin," he said, "where 
there are about 2,000 students, I spoke to a large 
audience of young men wearing the khaki of the United 
States. I was telling them of America's real purposes 
and aims and ideals in this war. It seemed to me that 
from the outset the audience took strangely little in- 
terest in the things I was talking about, the cause for 
which I was pleading. 

"For the most part, once they had learned that 
American patriotism was my theme, they sat with 
folded arms, staring wearily up at the ceiling. From 
time to time they'd turn and look at each other and 
smile superciliously, sort of pityingly. There was a 
good deal of fidgeting and shuffling of feet. Several 
times, generally at the most strongly patriotic portions of 
my talk, sounds which bore every sign of being subdued 
hisses could be heard. Later it was offered to me in 
explanation that these were warnings to the noisy ones 
to be quiet; but they didn't sound that way to me. 



[ 16 ] 



Snappin<5 of Rifle Triggers 

''When I began to quote from some of President 
Wilson's messages," continued Dr. McElroy, "the rattle 
of snapping rifle triggers throughout the audience — the 
men, being under compulsory military training, have 
guns — sounded very much like an attempt to break up 
the speech. 

"Finally I couldn't stand it any longer. I deter- 
mined to find out whether it was my fault or whether 
it was the American point of view that these young men 
objected to. So I leaned forward and I deliberately 
insulted them. 

" 'Do you know what I think of you from your con- 
duct tonight?' I said. 'I think you're a bunch of 
damned traitors ! ' 

"Well, what do you think happened? A loud out- 
cry of protest? A stampede to pull me down on the 
platform? A demand that I retract that affront to 
their university? No, sir; not any of those things. 
What happened was absolutely nothing — not a mur- 
mur, not a sound, except that toward the back of the 
room a few men snickered. 

"I was not only thunderstruck; I was appalled. If 
a speaker said that to a group of men at my university, 
Princeton, I should hate to have to answer for the conse- 
quences. But even then I thought I 'd test them a little 
further — give them another chance, as it were. So a 
little later I said: 'I've often wondered what it would 
be like to speak before a Prussian audience. I think I 
Imow now.' Still there was no protest — no slightest 
sign of resentment. 

"I hesitate," Dr. McElroy continued, "to accuse an 
entire university of disloyalty, and many people have 
since tried to reassure me as to Wisconsin. They insist 

[17 ] 



that it's absolutely all right, and I certainly hope that it 
is. But to my mind that episode stands out as one of the 
most disgraceful things I have encountered, especially 
coming from a state in which 100,000 disloyal votes were 
recently registered. I say that a thing like that should 
be investigated. ' ' 

Many Enemy Sympathizers 

Commenting on the prevalence of enemy sympathizers 
in America, Dr. McElroy stated that 30 per cent of the 
Wisconsin population today is German and 20 per cent 
German by marriage. 

"We are not even yet fully awake to what this 
means, ' ' he declared. ' ' I was out there when the news of 
the German advance was coming through, and from the 
reception it got you would scarcely have gained the im- 
pression that it was a blow to America. You would have 
been far more likely to suppose that it was somehow a 
cause for congratulation in this country." 

Dr. McElroy also named Oregon, North Dakota and 
Michigan as states with extensive communities that are 
quite undisguised in their sympathy for the foe, while 
in Monroe County, 111., he declared, feeling against 
American participation in the war ran so high that one 
delegation of LibeHy Loan orators was threatened with 
shot-guns. 

In Washington county, in the south of Illinois, it was, 
according to Mrs. Myra H. Willson, chairman of the 
Women's Liberty Loan Committee, impossible to find 
any one willing to serve as chairman for either the Lib- 
erty Loan or war stamp work. Sinclair, Adams, Macou- 
pin and Bond counties, Mrs. Willson added in a letter 
to the National Security League, are also all strongly 
German in make-up. 

[18 ] 



"It is about time," said Dr. McElroy, "that we 
stopped just talking about these things. "We know the 
character of what's going on— the Secretary of the In- 
terior himself has told of ' DeutscJiluiid Ucher Alles' 
being sung in the Western schools — and we ought to 
know by now where such things lead. They constitute 
a menace to the nation, now and in the future. The 
time has come when we must take some decided action 
in the matter." 



Exhibit C 

Resolution of the Faculty of the University of 
Wisconsin Adopted April 24, 1918 

The Faculty of the University of Wisconsin resents 
deeply the accusations made by Professor Robert McNutt 
McElroy against the University, He charges that its 
students are disloyal, because, cold and rain-soaked, in 
an unheated auditorium, some of them showed discour- 
tesy to him as a speaker. The Faculty believes that a 
public speaker who bases a judgment so sweeping upon 
the experience of such a meeting, who attributes to dis- 
loyalty the restlessness and inattention of an audience 
held for two hours and a half under such physical con- 
ditions that a large proportion of the students present 
had to be put under medical care, such conditions that 
two citizens who took part have since died from exposure, 
sufficiently brands his judgment. 

The University of Wisconsin, since the beginning of 
the war, has expended its utmost resources to bring 
home to its students, and to the State, the significance of 
the present great struggle for democracy. Through 
press and platform it has been and is now conducting a 

[ 19 ] 



systematic campaign of education on the issues and 
measures of the war, a campaign that has helped in the 
establishment throughout the State of a fighting patriot- 
ism as vigorous as any section or element in the country 
can show. In all this patriotic work it has had the eager 
support and constructive aid of the very students that 
Professor McElroy slanders. No greater obstacle could 
be opposed to the success of this campaign, and of the 
work of the National Security League, than such hostility 
and suspicion as are excited by Professor McElroy 's 
hasty and ill-considered judgments. 

The Faculty is custodian of the honor of an institu- 
tion whose sons fought in the armies of England and 
France before America became a party to the war, have 
been in the forefront of the American line since it has 
existed, and many of whom have already made the final 
sacrifice for their cause. It cannot allow that honor to be 
impugned by the agent of a responsible organization, 
such as the National Security League, without demand- 
ing redress, full, explicit, and emphatic. The Faculty 
calls, with confidence, upon the National Security League 
to exert its best efforts to undo the damage done by the 
accusations which its agent has spread broadcast over the 
country. 



[20 ] 



Exhibit D 

Letters to President Van Hise From JMen Who Were 
Present at the Agricultural Stock Pavilion Dur- 
ing THE Address of Dr. McElroy, on April 6 

letter from JOHN M. OLIN, ATTORNEY, MADISON, WIS- 
CONSIN, ALSO TRUSTEE OF TIIIC NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL 
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 

Madison, Wisconsin, May 2, 1918. 

President Charles B. Van Hise, 
Madison, Wisconsin. 

Dear Mr. Van Hise: I have read with much inter- 
est your letter to President Hibben of Princeton Uni- 
versity. Wliat yon state is fully corroborated by my 
recollection of what occurred at the meeting of April 
6th at the Stock Pavilion. I sat on the stage during 
the whole meeting and was not more than tAventy feet 
from the speaker, Mr. McElroy. I heard nothing 
whatever from Mr. McElroy criticising anybody con- 
nected with the university. I felt so strongly about 
this that when my partner Mr. Butler within a feAv 
days after the address received a letter from his friend 
Judge Oscar Hallam, of St. Paul, which enclosed a 
newspaper clipping containing the charges of McElroy 
after he had got back East, I positively denied any 
such statement as McElroy claims to have made, was 
made on that occasion, and I at once wrote Judge Hal- 
lam to that effect. Within a day or two thereafter, 
I learned from others that something was said by him 
just about as you put it in your letter, and on that 

[ 21 ] 



account I wrote another letter to Judge Hallam cor- 
recting my first letter to the extent of stating that un- 
doubtedly McElroy said something but denied absolutely 
that he said what he claims to have said. I merely 
mention these facts to show that as stated in your let- 
ter, whatever McElroy said was said rather to him- 
self than to any audience, and not in a way to attract 
any attention either on the part of the student body or 
anybody else. Indeed had McElroy called the stu- 
dents as he claims to have done a lot of "damned 
Prussians," so that they could have heard the same, I 
do not believe McElroy would have continued speaking 
very long, for I think the student body would have seen 
to it that he was not permitted to say anything further. 

Very truly yours, 

John M. Olin. 

letter from o. d. brandenburg, editor in chief, madi- 
son democrat 

Madison, Wisconsin, 
May 6, 1918. 
Dr. Chas. R. Va7i Hise, 
President of the University of Wisconsin, 
Madison, Wisconsin. 

Dear Dr. Van HiSe : At South Bend, Indiana, a few 
days ago while away from home, I noticed your letter 
to President Hibben of Princeton University with ref- 
erence to the published assertion of Professor Robert 
IMcNutt McElroy that in his address in Madison, 
April 6th, he had deliberately sought to insult his audi- 
ence by saying: 

"Do you know what I think of your conduct tonight- 
I think you're a bunch of damned traitors"; and it is 

[22 ] 



also claimed that he referred to his auditors as "damned 
Prussians." 

Your answer in eifect that nothing of the sort oc- 
curred, at least that nothing of the sort was audible, is 
strong and reasonably complete. Your language and 
your intimations are fully justified; but I wish to add 
my testimony to the effect that Dr. McElroy made 
neither of these statements. I sat within twenty feet of 
him and heard every word he uttered. There were no 
allusions openly or in suppressed tones to "damned 
traitors" or "damned Prussians" or a single reference 
of any nature calculated to be a reflection upon the 
loyalty of his audience. 

Indeed, it is but just to Br. McElroy to say that his 
speech was one of fine diction and his poise that of a 
complete gentleman. When this is said, I think all is 
said — and all would have been well but for this later 
astounding assertion by Dr. McElroy that he deliberately 
aimed to insult this audience. If he actually makes 
such a claim, I regret to say that he is guilty of falsi- 
fication. I have been a reporter for more than thirty 
years, trained carefully to hear what public speakers 
may say and I cannot possibly be mistaken when I now 
declare that Dr. McElroy said nothing to insult his 
audience. He never called the people "damned Prus- 
sians." He never called them "damned traitors." Do 
you imagine. Dr. Van Hise, that reporters representing 
daily papers in Madison and Milwaukee, sitting at the 
very feet of Dr. McElroy would have let escape any 
such sensational utterances? It is unbelievable. Had 
Dr. McElroy called the people before him "damned 
traitors" or "damned Prussians" these reporters in- 
stantly would have played that fact up into the "lead" of 
their reports ; yet, not one of them did so. These reporters 

[23 ] 



were not deaf. They would have heard any such re- 
marks had they been made by Dr. McElroy and they 
would have given them the importance that the sensa- 
tional character of the utterances justified. Dr. McEl- 
roy, I am bound to believe, either has not been correctly 
quoted or he is guilty of inexcusable misrepresentation — 
misrepresentation that discredits him as a gentleman, 
that discredits the university which harbors him as a 
member of its faculty. 

I write today. Dr. Van Hise, merely to commend your 
condemnation of Dr. McElroy, your defense of the stu- 
dents and of the loyalty of our people. 

I have the honor to be, 

Sincerely, 

0. D. Brandenburg. 



LETTER OF F. H. EMVELL, PROFESSOR OP ACCOUNTING, 
UNIVERSITY OF VvaSCONSIN 

Madison, May 7, 1918. 

President Clias. E. Van Ilise, 
University Hall. 

Dear President Van Hise : During the Liberty Day 
program at the Stock Pavilion April 6, 1918, I was 
seated on the platform in the third row directly back of 
Senator Lenroot. 

The only statement which I heard Professor McEl- 
roy make to the audience was in effect as follows : "It is 
the first time I have been applauded by the Americans 
and hissed by the enemies in the same audience." This 
statement was made in such an extremely low tone that 
the audience could not have heard the remark. In fact, 

[24] 



I asked Professor Commons who was seated next to me, 
if he understood what Professor McElroy had said, and 
he replied ' ' No. ' ' 

When Professor McElroy finally concluded his re- 
marks and returned to his seat he turned to Miss Burke 
and said in a low voice, but so clearly that I heard it 
distinctly, ' ' I believe there are a lot of damn traitors in 
that audience." 

These statements are the only ones which I heard, 
and I believe I gave careful attention to the speech. 
Yours very truly, 

F. H. El WELL. 



LETTER OF JOHN R. COMMONS, PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL 
ECONOMY, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN. 

Madison, May 9, 1918. 

President Charles R. Van Hise, 
University of Wisconsin. 

Dear President Van Hise: Replying to your in- 
quiry regarding my recollection of the incidents con- 
nected with Mr. McElroy 's address at the Stock Pavilion, 
April sixth, would say that I sat next to Professor 
Elwell, in the third row directly back of the speaker, 
Mr. McElroy. Parts of his speech I heard quite plainly, 
especially the first part. Other parts I was not able to 
comprehend. Finally, when he started to criticize the 
audience, I noticed something unusual, but could not 
gather the words which he said. Professor Elwell, who 
apparently heard what he said, turned to me and asked 
me if I heard it and I shook my head or said I did not. 

At the close of the meeting and after the other speak- 
ers had finished, Professor Elwell said in effect, "Cer- 
[ 25 ] 



tainly President Van Hise ought to correct McElroy's 
impression or he will go away with the wrong notion of 
what the boj^s intended." And I said in effect, "Well, 
I don't know what he said, but if you feel so, certainly 
go ahead and catch Van Hise before he gets away, for 
evidently he does not think anything has occurred." 
Sincerely yours, 

John E. Commons. 



LETTER OF JOHN S. DONALD, FOR]\tER SECRETARY OF STATE, 
OF THE STATE OF ^^^SCONSIN 

Mount Horeb, Wis., May 8, 1918. 

President Cliarles R. Van Hise, 
University of Wisconsin, 
Madison, Wisconsin. 

My Dear President Van Hise : I noted in the press 
your letter to President Hibben of Princeton University 
protesting the charges made by Professor McElroy of 
that institution against the students of the University of 
Wisconsin. The bitterness which has resulted from the 
visit of Professor McElroy to Wisconsin is to be re- 
gretted, and not only as Chairman of the Dane County 
Council of Defense, but as a citizen of the state, I wish 
to say that I approve decidedly of your letter to Presi- 
dent Hibben and especially that part which invites him 
to investigate what occurred at the meeting over which 
there has been so much controversy and to ascertain for 
himself the true attitude of the citizens of Madison, as 
well as the student body. 

In saying this, may I also make a statement in regard 
to my impression of Professor McElroy's attitude and 
that of his audience? 

[ 26 ] 



I occupied a position on the platform in front and 
directly to the right of the speaker on the side seats fac- 
ing him. The speaker followed his notes closely and 
must have realized that he was not holding his audience 
for at one point he made the inquiry as to whether or 
not he could be heard at the rear of the pavilion and asked 
that hands be raised if his voice was reaching them. 
This was said in a cold, almost defiant manner. Some 
hands were raised. 

In regard to that part of his speech concerning which 
the controversy has chiefly arisen, I understood him to 
say during his discussion of Pro-Germans and their atti- 
tude on the war and referring to the Berger vote in this 
state that he had hoped to face a Pro-German audience 
and "by God, I believe there are some of them here." 
It was difficult to follow him even in my favorable posi- 
tion on the platform and in the manner in which this was 
said, it is easy to understand how such a remark would 
not easily be interpreted by anyone in the audience in 
the light in which Professor McElroy has since seemed 
to wish to have it understood. 

Permit me to further say in regard to my observa- 
tions as to the behavior of the audience, I did not notice 
any demonstration or unkind attitude of the students 
or of anyone else excepting the departure of persons, 
which, considering the discomfort and length of the pro- 
gram, was not to be unexpected. I was much surprised, 
therefore, at the rebuke which was given to the boys in 
khaki by the Chairman of the meeting. His remarks at 
the time and the frankness in which they were expressed 
should have been sufficient satisfaction to any person 
participating in a patriotic program and especially to a 
supposedly honored guest with temperament and quali- 

[ 27 ] 



ties of mind adapted for teaching or for promoting loy- 
alty and democracy. 

Sincerely yours, 

J. S. Donald. 



Exhibit E 

{Chicago Tribune, May 13, 1918.) 

SECURITY LEAGUE CHIEF UPHOLDS U. OF W. 
LOYALTY 

S. A. Menken Absolves Students in McSlroy Affair 

The University of AVisconsin is officially cleared by 
the National Security league of any suspicion of dis- 
loyalty or lack of patriotic ardor. In addition, the 
league officially praises its unusually effective patriotic 
effort during the war and bears testimony to the excel- 
lent work done by its students, faculty, and alumni alike. 
This certificate of patriotic character was given yester- 
day to The Tribune by S. Stanwood Menken of New 
I'ork, president of the league, after Mr. Menken had 
taken a hurried journey from New York to Madison, 
Wis., for the sole purpose of investigating at first hand 
the recent McElroy incident. 

Mr. Menken further said yesterdny that a statement 
would undoubtedly be forthcoming in a day or two 
from Prof. McElroy himself denying the correctness 
of some of the statements attributed to him concerning 
the university and its students, the latter of whom he is 
reported to have denounced as "damned Prussians" and 
disloynl during a speech made in the stock pavilion of 
the university on April 6. 

[28 ] 



Alleges Misunderstanding 

Prof. McElroy's ire was particularly aroused, ac- 
cording to Mr. Menken, when the audience showed rest- 
lessness during the reading of the war message of the 
president. Thereupon he said, "Any man who does not 
in all things subscribe fully to these sentiments expressed 
by President Wilson is a traitor, not only to his coun- 
try, but to all humanity." This, said Mr. Menken, the 
audience took to mean a generalization while Prof. Me- 
ous speaking campaign, and annoyed at the restlessness 
Elroy, laboring under a great strain because of an ardu- 
in the hall, intended it as a personal gibe at his liearers. 

Because there was no resentment expressed, Prof. 
McElroy leaped at the conclusion that the university 
students had not sufficient courage to resent an imputa- 
tion upon their loyalty, and so expressed himself in the 
east. 

When the exact facts are explained, upon Mr. Men- 
ken's arrrival in New York, he said he thought Prof. 
McElroy would issue a statement admitting his miscon- 
ception of the attitude of tlie university students and 
regretting the episode in its entirety. 

Menken's Official Statement 

Mr. Menken's official statement on behalf of the 
league follows: 

"I went to AYisconsin because the executive commit- 
tee of the National Security league wished me to carry 
Prof. McElroy 's statement that he never gave forth any 
utterance reelecting directly or indirectly on either the 
loyalty of Wisconsin or the university. No one could 
have done so. Wisconsin has, of course, had the burden 
of La Follette and Bcrger to bear, but these factors have 

[ 29 ] 



merely served to rouse the people ; to make them fighting 
patriots to a degree unlmown in most of the east. 

"The records of the state and the university are re- 
markable. President Van Hise assured me that 1,500 
students and 3,000 alumni had gone into the army and 
he detailed the wonderful work being done on construc- 
tive lines for the permanent upbuilding of the nation. 
We spoke of the German- Americans. I found that, as in 
the east, the vast majority of Germans are as loyal as 
any other element, and as bitter toward the few Prus- 
sian malcontents as any native born citizen." 

Perils of Autocracy 

"The intelligent German knows the perils of autoc- 
racy and the sorrow for mankind if we should fail to 
attain victory. He is a strong believer in individual 
liberty and in many instances he or his parents fled from 
Germany because they were determined to risk life un- 
der new conditions rather than suffer from 'kultur. ' 

"As to the McElroy incident, during his speech it is 
clear the students were cold and not interested in an ad- 
dress which, though of great academic merit, did not ap- 
peal to them. They showed their restlessness at an in- 
opportune moment, when McElroy was reading from 
the president's message. He misinterpreted their action 
as that of disloyalty. It was most unfortunate, and 
when he is convinced of that fact I am sure he will be 
glad to say so. 

"Prof. McElroy is intense in his work, which is one 
of the broadest and most far reaching ever undertaken 
in this country. He believes in it so thoroughly that it 
was hard for him to realize that freshmen and sopho- 
mores, rain soaked, could be showing fatigue and not 
irreverence for the words he quoted. 

[30 ] 



Cheers for Wisconsin 

''The league at its annual meeting last Wednesday 
indicated in the cheers for Wisconsin, in which Prof. 
McElroy led, just where we stand. We in the past 
have had full acquaintance with the patriotic war work 
done by the University of Wisconsin and with the other 
undertakings of the university for the last twenty years 
to lay the foundation for true extension work among 
the citizens. It has taught and served so progressively 
that any reflection upon it would be an outrage. 

"There is no difference in tlie quality of true patriot- 
ism east, west, north, or south, and it is important that 
all such suggestion be eliminated. It is destructive of 
the splendid national unity which is one of the great 
benefits that have been won through the Avar." 

Mr. Menken left yesterday at noon for New York, 
and upon his arrival there the foregoing statement, to- 
gether with the expected statement from Prof. McElroy, 
will be officially given out. With this it is expected the 
incident will be closed. 

Exhibit F 

Telegrams which were sent to President Menken 

AFTER HIS VISIT AT MaDISON 

WESTERN UNION 
TELEGRAM 

May 24, 1918. 
8. Stanivood Menken, 
53 Williams St., 
New York. 
Have letter from Pepper indicating that no further 
action will be taken in the McElroy matter. Is this cor- 
rect? 

Charles R. Van Hise. 

[31] 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



020 914 421 9^ 



WESTERN UNION 
TELEGRAM 

May 28, 1918. 
S. St.anwood Menken, 
52 Williains St., 
New York. 
When may we expect a statement in regard to the 
attitude of the National Security League toward the 
McElroy affair? We had anticipated receiving the in- 
formation before this time. 

Charles R. Van Hise. 

Exhibit G 

Resolution of Executive Committee of National Se- 
curity League 
Dated May 17. Received May 31. 
See above, p. 8. 

Exhibit H 

WESTERN UNION 
TELEGRAM 

May 31, 1918. 
8. Stanivood Menken, 
52 Williams St., 
New York.' 
When you were here I stated that we had no com- 
plaint to make against the National Security League; 
that our charges v;ore against Professor McElroy. Since 
the Executive Committee of the League endorses McEl- 
roy 's statements and acts and your report as President 
makes a charge against this University, I withdraw the 
statement that we have no complaint to make against 

the National Security League 

Charles R. Van Hise. 
[32 ] 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



020 914 421 9 



HolliriGrer Coro. 



